Suppr超能文献

联合治疗对类风湿关节炎关节破坏的影响:一项随机对照试验的网状Meta分析

Effect of combination therapy on joint destruction in rheumatoid arthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

Graudal Niels, Hubeck-Graudal Thorbjørn, Tarp Simon, Christensen Robin, Jürgens Gesche

机构信息

Department of Rheumatology IR4242, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Denmark.

Department of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Gentofte, Denmark.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2014 Sep 22;9(9):e106408. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106408. eCollection 2014.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite significant cost differences, the comparative effect of combination treatments of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) with and without biologic agents has rarely been examined. Thus we performed a network meta-analysis on the effect of combination therapies on progression of radiographic joint erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The following combination drug therapies compared versus single DMARD were investigated: Double DMARD: 2 DMARDs (methotrexate, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, injectable gold, cyclosporine, chloroquine, azathioprin, penicillamin) or 1 DMARD plus low dose glucocorticoid (LDGC); triple DMARD: 3 DMARDs or 2 DMARDs plus LDGC; biologic combination: 1 DMARD plus biologic agent (tumor necrosis factor α inhibitor (TNFi) or abatacept or tocilizumab or CD20 inhibitor (CD20i)). Randomized controlled trials were identified in a search of electronic archives of biomedical literature and included in a star-shaped network meta-analysis and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement protocol. Effects are reported as standardized mean differences (SMD). The effects of data from 39 trials published in the period 1989-2012 were as follows: Double DMARD: -0.32 SMD (CI: -0.42, -0.22); triple DMARD: -0.46 SMD (CI: -0.60, -0.31); 1 DMARD plus TNFi: -0.30 SMD (CI: -0.36, -0.25); 1 DMARD plus abatacept: -0.20 SMD (CI: -0.33, -0.07); 1 DMARD plus tocilizumab: -0.34 SMD (CI: -0.48, -0.20); 1 DMARD plus CD20i: -0.32 SMD (CI: -0.40, -0.24). The indirect comparisons showed similar effects between combination treatments apart from triple DMARD being significantly better than abatacept plus methotrexate (-0.26 SMD (CI: -0.45, -0.07)) and TNFi plus methotrexate (-0.16 SMD (CI: -0.31, -0.01)).

CONCLUSION

Combination treatment of a biologic agent with 1 DMARD is not superior to 2-3 DMARDs including or excluding LDGC in preventing structural joint damage. Future randomized studies of biologic agents should be compared versus a combination of DMARDs.

摘要

背景

尽管成本差异显著,但很少有研究考察使用和不使用生物制剂的改善病情抗风湿药物(DMARDs)联合治疗的比较效果。因此,我们对联合治疗对类风湿关节炎(RA)患者关节影像学侵蚀进展的影响进行了网状Meta分析。

方法与结果

研究了以下与单一DMARD相比的联合药物治疗:双重DMARD:2种DMARD(甲氨蝶呤、柳氮磺吡啶、来氟米特、注射用金、环孢素、氯喹、硫唑嘌呤、青霉胺)或1种DMARD加低剂量糖皮质激素(LDGC);三重DMARD:3种DMARD或2种DMARD加LDGC;生物制剂联合:1种DMARD加生物制剂(肿瘤坏死因子α抑制剂(TNFi)或阿巴西普或托珠单抗或CD20抑制剂(CD20i))。通过检索生物医学文献电子档案库确定随机对照试验,并纳入星形网状Meta分析,并根据系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)声明协议进行报告。效应以标准化均数差(SMD)表示。1989年至2012年期间发表的39项试验数据的效应如下:双重DMARD:SMD为-0.32(CI:-0.42,-0.22);三重DMARD:SMD为-0.46(CI:-0.60,-0.31);1种DMARD加TNFi:SMD为-0.30(CI:-0.36,-0.25);1种DMARD加阿巴西普:SMD为-0.20(CI:-0.33,-0.07);1种DMARD加托珠单抗:SMD为-0.34(CI:-0.48,-0.20);1种DMARD加CD20i:SMD为-0.32(CI:-0.40,-0.24)。间接比较显示,联合治疗之间的效果相似,但三重DMARD明显优于阿巴西普加甲氨蝶呤(SMD为-0.26(CI:-0.45,-0.07))和TNFi加甲氨蝶呤(SMD为-0.16(CI:-0.31,-0.01))。

结论

在预防关节结构损伤方面,1种DMARD与生物制剂联合治疗并不优于包括或不包括LDGC的2 - 3种DMARD联合治疗。未来生物制剂的随机研究应与DMARD联合治疗进行比较。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/950f/4171366/33feba0eef1b/pone.0106408.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验